Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Monday, April 2, 2012

I'm going to keep this short since I wanted to start an open-forum discussion but, is everyone as baffled as I am? I don't write much because my new job is quite limiting, but sometimes I just have to log in and get some things off my chest.

This is not good news for the GOP. I just want to know how so many people could be backing President Obama. Just look at the three biggest broken promises:

- Economy not fixed in first term: unemployment is still well above the promise to reduce it to 7.0% by the end of 2010.

- He not only failed to cut the deficit in half by the end of his term, he has added nearly as much to our debt in 3 years as GWB did in 8.

- Guantanamo Bay is STILL OPEN (this doesn't have as much of an impact on the economy as many other issues, but it was still a promise I believe Obama made for the sake of getting elected, and he obviously hasn't kept it).

20 comments:

The media is doing its leftist job. It's making obama look like a saint, and everyone else look terrible. Look at this article (though it says it's a blog, it was presented on Yahoo news): http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/tepid-romney-endorsements-bracket-214956089.html

"Tepid" endorsements? Tepid? Wow! I didn't know getting so many high-quality endorsements is tepid. If these are tepid, what does obama call $1 million from Bill Maher? Toxic?

The point is, the media is doing everything it can in any way it can to paint a bad picture of the GOP. That's why you see Obama still doing so well even though he has done so poorly.

I think the biggest part here is the media spin. Pachyderm Pride brought up a good point. It seems no matter how good the GOP candidates are (some are better than others) and how bad Obama is, it doesn't matter. Obama is made out to look really good, and everyone else is tarnished.

As far as Romney having a higher negative rating as the previous anonymous poster said, what is that a product of? I'm glad PP didn't endorse or make this post about endorsing one candidate (we as a blog do not yet endorse any one GOP candidate) but focusing on the Romney issue, I will say I think he is a lot better than most negative opinions, and I think the negative feelings about him are due to the constant media spinning. Without endorsing him, and just looking at his resumé, he is republican but works great with democrats, he has a history of turning things around, and he is scandal free. If you put these three labels on anyone as a candidate for any leadership position, I would think they would get a much higher praise than he is getting. I really do think this has to do with media spin above all.

Thanks to Pachyderm for getting on here, and I hope to see more posts about what people think.

Poor ratings of the GOP candidates have a lot to do with how furiously they've all attacked each other, rather than focus on Obama. Which was also ballooned further by record-breaking amounts of super PAC spending that primarily went towards negative ad campaigns.

It’s not all that much of a surprise to me that this is the ultimate result.

I disagree. Sure the GOP have fought a bunch. But that's normal for a campaign. Hillary and Obama fought a bunch. i think you fall in line with exactly who this article is talking about. You are in the group that says "poor ratings of the GOP candidates have a lot to do with how furiously they've attacked each other."

IMO - they haven't attacked each other any more or less than any other campaign. The MEDIA tells you they have. The constant news about how bad the "attacks" are and all that. Even CNN airs attack ads on the news. They say "oh we just want to show you this" buit they are really playing the game. They are promoting anything ANTI GOP they can to help Obama. It's working, and you're following it.

UrlTester: The Hilary & Obama match really doesn't compare to the current GOP primary. They didn't run constant smear-campaigns against each other or even spend a small fraction of the millions in negative advertising.

My comment also isn’t based on opinion, it’s based on fact. The campaign spending between the candidates and Super PACs in this primary, particularly in the negative advertisements, is record-breaking on all fronts.

That’s just a fact of the matter.

Media bias does in fact go in both directions though, keep in mind. There’s liberal media bias just as there is conservative, and while I won’t try to state or distract from the point on which may or may not be more common, attempting to brush of anything negative about the GOP candidates as ‘liberal media bias’ would be just as disingenuous as the other side attempting to brush off anything negative about the Obama administration as ‘conservative media bias.’

At the end of the day, neither of the accusations truly do any good or provide any helpful information. It serves much better for both sides and everyone as a whole to instead attempt to find the facts.

But Obama DID NOT fix the economy. So according to you, it's perfectly fine for someone to make a promise, then when it doesn't pan out, blame it on someone or something else?

That brings me to the next observation. Obama followers are blind. No matter what, he can't do anything wrong. That's sad in and of itself.

"As for closing Guantanamo .....He realized after being briefed that it's not possible." True or not, that doesn't make the fact go away: Obama made a promise to get elected, he did not deliver. It shows that he made all these promises just to get elected.

You're the type of person that would say Trayvon Martin deserved it because he was attacking someone. Regardless, it doesn't matter. Still was unarmed. It's the same thing. You say "the gop blocks him" but it doesn't matter. Regardless, Obama still made the promise.

If you truly believe that he is still a good, effective president, but can keep placing blame elsewhere, your whole comment can be summed up with "baaaaahhhhh"

I use SIRI on my iPhone to dictate my voice. Perhaps if your hillbilly ass gets an edumucation (Haha) you could afford such a device. As far as backing up.....ask every other person here first. You didn't because you only listen to the things you want to acknowledge. Everyone else has to "provide sources" and "prove" opinions while the rest of you low life's get to have a big old asshole party. Nope

The millions/billions of tax-payer funded stimulus did nothing but shore up the unions - major Obama/Dem donors.

Our extraordinary capitalist economic system HAS begun a slow (stuttering) recovery DESPITE 'the Won's' attempts to destroy it. I fear the 'flexibility' allowed by a second Obama term will spell the end of America as we know her.

The 'promise' to close Gitmo should never have been made. Who - in their right mind - would want those 'people' living anywhere near their community?

The 'oil subsidy' lie - is actually a tax deduction... designed to HELP those companies INCREASE production and KEEP over NINE MILLION PEOPLE EMPLOYED.

What - in our Constitution - gives Obama the 'right' to funnel billions of taxpayer dollars to his bundlers in the name of unproven, untested and constantly FAILED 'clean energy'? If it was such a 'great deal' - why were said bundlers paid FIRST - BEFORE taxpayers in the eventual and completely foreseeable implosion of those businesses?

On top of all this - he's driven wedges throughout our society - Race - I'm old enough to REMEMBER the pangs of desegregation, affirmative action, etc - AND the rewards. We'd put that behind us and before Obama we had moved on.

'Income inequality' which is complete Marxist nonsense... under his 'plan' we'd ALL be 'equally' poor... except, of course, for the 'elite' like Obama and his ilk... someone MUST tell the sheeple what they need, after all.

The sickening use of children - who are UNTRUTHFULLY touted as being denied health care... they ARE NOT. I have PERSONAL knowledge of numerous charities and organizations who do NOTHING BUT make sure sick kids get the care they need. Much BETTER care than Ocare could even HOPE to offer.

And the War on Women?! Please!! With one hand it's, 'I am woman, I am STRONG' and with the other it's - gimme, gimme, gimme - FREE! As a woman, who's paid her OWN way her WHOLE life, the likes of Sandra Fluke and Wasserman-Schultz, crying about 'needs' and how everyone ELSE should be forced to pay for them - make me sick! Our TAX dollars ALREADY pay for 'women's health' issues!

ACORN promotion of DEAD and illegal voters, New Black Panthers staked out at poling places, Fast and Furious, NDAA, ignoring Supreme Court mandates, Executive Order placing a moratorium on deportation of ILLEGAL aliens - another which would evoke a TOTAL government takeover of EVERYTHING in the country - IN PEACETIME!

And our BABIES - are BORN in DEBT to the tune of $145,000 before they even take their first breath - with more added DAILY.

@ Anonymous - Hey Comrade, is THIS is your idea of America? Is THIS is the legacy you seek to leave for your kids and grandkids?

Sorry - I never bought into the 'hopey changey' thing... I'm not fond of Romney - but it looks like he's our (R) guy. I WILL work to make sure he ousts this Marxist... and return America to her Constitutional roots. It won't happen overnight - but I'm confident that it WILL happen...

But carry on Comrade - if you choose to. We are still FREE - for the time being anyway.

I'm curious, however. Did you think you were just going to come in here, drop this witty one liner, say nothing else, and walk away with "ah ha, I got them?!"

It's sad. Is this the difference between conservatives and liberals? If we make a claim, we back it (see any of our posts about taxes, tax rates, etc.) If a liberal makes a claim, it's a one-line, rhetorical, factually incorrect slogan, chant, or saying? Is that the difference (I'm genuinely asking).

Oh yah, to show you're claim is false. Did you forget about the Eisenhower presidency? Take a look.... again, us conservatives give proof behind what we say: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Presidents_and_control_of_Congress

I think a big part of it is how the conservative case is presented. Not necessarily by the candidates themselves, but by their supporters. Reading comments on conservative news sources, and even here, which is more civil than many other forums, I am left with a very negative view of conservatives. Even on this post, there are examples. Dara's comment, with it's frequent capitalization of words and references to people who disagree as "sheeple" or "comrade," draws to my mind someone frothing at the mouth with irrational anger.

While it isn't fair to dismiss ideas based on the personalities of the supporters of the ideas, it happens. Conservative commenters seem to be working their hardest to make sure no one wants to be associated with them, and by extension, their ideas. It's like making fun of everyone, and then wondering why no one wants to be your friend. When people who appear unreasonable share an opinion, it makes me suspect the reasonableness of the opinion.

In my personal opinion, I don't feel that any of the Republican candidates have presented economic plans that appeal to me, and that they are going out of their way to take positions on social issues that I find abhorrent.

The Herd

http://the405radio.blogspot.com/ - Great radio show hosted by John Grant (@JohnG405) - The Elephant in the Room has been on this show in segments and as a co-host. Click the link to listen to previous shows